The US secret plan on Damascus foiled: the Russian role before and after the US/UK/France attack revealed

Donald Trump has climbed down from the tree he climbed up a few days ago when he gathered a large military force and firepower similar to “operation desert storm” (but without ground forces). “Plan A” consisted of a destructive attack on Syria to destroy its army, presidential palace, command and control bases, elite force, strategic military and ammunition warehouses, radar, defence systems and political leadership institutions.

Prior to the triple attack on Syria by the US – UK – France, intensive contacts were carried out by Russia and President Vladimir Putin himself – at around 04:00 am– to reduce the attack and go to a softer, less significant “Plan B”.

Russia, in its contact with several heads of state, rejected any hit that could cripple the Syrian Army and instructed the leadership in Damascus that the West would now think very carefully before radically changing the balance of power in the Levant.

But what is the real reason behind the US – UK – France’s attack? Is it the claim of the “chemical attack” on Duma? The Organisation for the prohibition of the chemical weapons is already in Damascus and its members visit Duma this Saturday to inspect the location where the claimed use of a chemical attack was alleged to have taken place. Why not wait for the results?

Sources in Damascus explain that the Syrian Army and its allies, supported by Russia, were carrying out a large attack on rural Idlib and had reached Abu al-Duhur airport when, all of a sudden, the military operation stopped. The entire spearhead force was moved to Ghouta. What happened?

Russia had informed the Syrian leadership of a large gathering of forces at Al-Tanf US-occupied military base on the Syrian-Iraqi borders, where tens of thousands of US proxies have received continuous military training. The Russians identified unusual military movements and understood that the US was preparing to push Syrian proxy forces to reach eastern Ghouta, linking itself with around 30,000 jihadists in Ghouta itself. This attack was planned to take place simultaneously with a diversion from Daraa, southern Syria, attacking south of Damascus so as to deceive the Syrian army and its allies into leaving smaller forces around the capital.

Syrian Research centre bombed by US/UK/France

The US plan – said the sources – consisted in supporting its proxies and the Ghouta jihadists to reach Damascus and take full control of it. But the shifting of the military operation from rural Idlib to Ghouta spoiled the US plan to impose on Russia an enforced stay in Lattakia and Tartous confined to a limited place, and to finally change the Syrian regime. This “genius’s plan” would have spoiled all Russia’s efforts deployed through almost three years of heavy involvement in the war in Syria, and would have given the US the upper hand , just at the moment when Moscow and the Syrian Army were about to end the war, with only few more pockets left to liberate.

Russia’s hit in Ghouta broke the US plan into pieces, and imposed the withdrawal of tens of thousands of militants from Ghouta along with their families, to the north of Syria. The capital is now much safer, with the remaining area south of Damascus occupied by Al-Qaeda and the “Islamic State” group (ISIS) in Yarmouk camp and al-Hajar al-Aswad.

Today Russia rendered the US – UK – France strike meaningless, both in respect of its content and its objectives. Russia was able to impose that US – UK – France carry out only a “limited attack” of little value, and with not much chance of altering the reality on the ground in Syria.

When Russia vowed to shoot down missiles fired at Syria, Trump answered: “Get ready Russia because they will be coming, nice, new and smart”. Russia, after the hit, replied: “We have used the old Soviet anti-Air defence system against these smart, new and very expensive missiles fired by the Americans”. Not only that, the US-UK air strikes hit objectives which Israel bombards almost on a regular basis. By showing the capability to stop two thirds – as declared by Russia – of the incoming missiles, Syria is taking it as a kind of “training with live ammunition against any future Israeli attack on Syrian territory”. Israel is very disappointed and seems not at all pleased with this end result.

Showing restrain and control, the US Secretary of Defence James Mattis – he who said “the Pentagon still has no independent evidence to confirm that there was a chemical weapons attack in Syria last week”-contested any wide scale attack on Syria that could have triggered a direct Russian involvement and deadly return of fire against US objectives. Mattis accepted “an honourable strike” to save his boss’s inexperienced face. In point of fact, the trio’s strike on Syria seems have boosted the Syrian Bashar al-Assad’s reputation: the population celebrated in the streets of Damascus, and mocked the western attack on their country!

The trio avoided at all times direct provocation of Russia, circumvented Russian bases and operational theatres instead of overflying. Russia imposed its presence and provoked the US and French navy by carrying out a simulated air attack, to show its willingness to hit back. The Russian navy was positioned opposite the Lebanese coast to cover that angle and avoid blind spots.

Moscow managed to avoid a direct confrontation with Washington outside its territory: US military bases surround Syria (Israel, Jordan, al-Tanf, al-Hasaka, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrein, Iraq, Turkey). Russia remembers how Leonid Brezhnev fell into the CIA’s trap in 1979, supporting the Mujahedeen six months prior to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan- trap. Zbigniew Brzezinski said the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was deliberately provoked by the US: “It was an excellent idea. It drew the Soviets into the Afghan war and we gave them Vietnam”. Putin has avoided the same US trap almost 40 years later.

What is the next step?

All eyes are directed on the northern city of Idlib controlled by al-Qaeda now that the fate of Damascus is secured. But why Idlib?

The situation in Yarmouk camp, south of Damascus, seems directly linked to that of Fua and Kfarya. During the Zabadani negotiation, it was agreed between al-Qaeda and Damascus’s allies to keep away from al-Yarmouk, in exchange for the two besieged cities in the north of Syria. However, Damascus is now pushing to clean the capital completely, attempting to persuade its allies to bypass previous commitments.

As far as Daraa and Quneitra in the south are concerned, it seems no one in Syria seems willing to provoke the US and Israel at this tense moment; this will maybe be left to the end. In al-Badiyah, the Syrian steppes, ISIS is totally surrounded and can only wait to be exterminated in the coming months.

Idlib remains despite the Turkish-Russian-Iranian economical and financial agreement. There is no doubt about the existence of strong differences of an economic nature between partners over Syria.

Turkish President Erdogan expressed his support and later satisfaction with the US strikes on Syria. Russia answered by asking him to deliver the city of Afrin to the Syrian government. Iran’s special envoy for Syrian affairs Ali Akbar Velayati overtly stated that the next objective is Idlib. Therefore, it is now feasible for Turkey to pull out of its dozen observation bases around Idlib, even as Russia pulled out of Afrin prior to the Turkish attack. And Russia expects Erdogan to cancel the previously agreed sale of the S-400 missiles any day.

Thus, the compass points to Idlib, Rastan, Jisr al-Shoughour and the Syrian Army forces gathering in rural Lattakia, ready to divide Idlib after liberating the many villages around it.

This will bring the world to the next “chemical attack” appointment in the next operational theatre of the Syrian army and its allies. Would the US stand by al-Qaeda? Why not? It has never really been a question of the use of chemical weapons, since the US holds the largest stockpile of chemical weapons worldwide: the real issue is the defeat of the US faced with the dominance of Russia over the Levant.

Proof read by: Maurice Brasher

If you read this reporting and you like it, please don’t feel embarrassed to contribute and help fund it for as little as 1 Euro. Your contribution, however small will help ensure its continuity. Thank you.

Middle East Politics is a testament to the truth that “Information is Power.” We thank Mr. Magnier for his informational efforts, constantly shedding light into the black hole of moral depravity that makes the western media.

It is now clear the US/NATO/Israel plan in Syria was to launch a military coup, beheading the Syrian regime, isolating the Russians in their power-pockets, and presenting the world with a fait accompli CIA-picked, takfiri-made, “new government” in Syria, a la Ukraine. UK’s Skripal show was launched as a diversion, to keep the Russian’s occupied and out of balance, their international prestige compromised, their diplomacy committed.

It was immediately followed by the Douma circus, also UK orchestrated, yet another false flag created to portray Syria crossing again Trump’s infamous “red line,” which prompted the first attack on Syria’s Shayrat air-base, April, 2017. The Russians predicted a second attack was coming, and Russian army chief of staff, Gen. Valery Gerasimov launched a stern warning against any US/NATO/Israel attack on Syria. What we didn’t know is what Mr. Magnier has now made evident, that there was a plan to hit Syria, Russia, and Iran, with a surprise of strategic consequences.

The Russian gambit was a repositioning of Syrian forces to nip the purported US/NATO/Israel offensive in the bud, effectively castling Assad, and putting the upcoming missile attack in check. The resulting attack was a choreographed show of firecrackers, which the Syrians enjoyed to the max, propelled Assad’s popularity, and exposed the US coalition as paper tigers, much roar and no bite. And that was that.

The Russian reaction has been in multiple fronts, among them revisiting the long term offer of providing Syria with the infamous S-300 missile defense system. The Russians play a delicate political dance in the ME, standing up for their strategic interests, at the same time avoiding the creation of more enemies that they can fight. Israel is one of them. Russia has been negotiating the sale of S-300s to Syria since 2007, and the Israelis have stopped the sale in different occasions. The issue resurfaced again in 2011, after Syria was under attack by proxy takfiri forces, and it was later discarded due to the vulnerability of the Syrian regime, in danger of collapsing, unable to protect strategic weapons such as the S-300.

The Israelis fear that once the Syrians obtain the S-300 system, a transfer of technology to Hezbollah will cripple their air force predominance in the skies of the Levant. And the Russians have paid attention to their plight, even though they went ahead with the sale of the same systems to Iran. Syria is too close to Israel, and the effect of these weapons on Israel’s defense would be catastrophic. The Russians have walked a fine line with the US land-carrier, supporting Syria without antagonizing Israel more than necessary. This time, after the Israelis attack on the T-4 airbase in Syria, followed by the US/UK/France firecrackers, Russia dusted off the old S-300 deal, and promised to sell them not just to Syria, but also “to other countries.” Does that mean Lebanon? Yemen? Qatar? Venezuela? Which countries?

The latest “attack” on Syria have shown for those who have the eyes to see, the political-military decay of the terminally ill Atlantic alliance. Their “intel” agencies, unable to create new tricks on the ground, are limited to repeat the same old lies again and again, lies that now can be predicted way in advance, and countered appropriately. Syria is on the way to total victory over the takfiris, and given the inherent contradictions, absolute lack of a strategy, and moral decomposition of the US current regime, their intervention in Syria is bound to end in an extraction, sooner or later, of all their occupying forces.

it is BETTER believe the AMERICANS & the BRITTISH …. war criminals … WHERE the weapons mass destruction in IRAQ ?
–
which IDIOT believes a old man with mobile phone in the mountains can ORGANIZE 3-4 planes falling down in America ?

I’m surprised the most by the naivety of Western strategists. They plan attacks without never considering syrian own military forces which have greatly improved in the last years ( see downed israeli f-16).

The US does not have a soul. Whatever the initial motivations, the American experiment was quickly overtaken by the City of London, who in the form of Zionist Bankers, control it today. It’s soul maybe gone but its heart is Zionist to the core,

Thank you for an excellent article! just one question; I wonder if your observation on Trump, “Mattis accepted “an honorable strike” to save his boss’s inexperienced face.” may be based on appearance rather than fact as; Trump had announced the US was withdrawing, when bingo, a false flag cw attack forces him to do a 180 turn and attack Syria.
Trump’s campaign platform promises which got him elected were to end foreign wars, bring troops home, reduce military spending. I think there is a push by the deep state to alienate his base by preventing him from delivering on his promises.
I also believe Mattis and Trump are on the same page and there goal was to keep this engagement as limited as possible if possible. The shrill retroric from Trump was to provide cover for a limited strike. That being said, I could be wrong as the fact is that the US had a broad range of targets (and the group had 300 missiles between them) but was only able to successfully hit three targets when firing 103 missiles. They may have done a “limited” strike because they couldn’t successfully hit anything:)

Finally some exclusive information (regarding the derailed Al Tanf attack) because you have not had much to say for some time, EJ, thank you!

On another note, Moscow is seriously lacking in their understanding of the enemy and its aim. It is beyond daft not to have given the Syrians an S-300 to station in Damascus (and perhaps one in Deir ez-Zor) as well as a Krasukha-4 electronic warfare complex to create a defensive yet passive bubble over their capitol. They should have done so in October 2015…

I totally agree, but I think Russia was operating on the war strategy of “Softly, softly, catche monkey.” They had to appear to be only minimally engaged to prevent an outright invasion by the US et al. By appearing to be half-heartedly supporting Syria they could overtime accomplish their goal of building up Syrian forces and capabilities. I don’t for a minute think that Syria has only s-200s and a few bits of Soviet era equipment, but I am delighted to see that the west believes it:)

You seem to have missed several things that will explain your misunderstanding.
Irrespective of this article’s well intentioned, but not wholly accurate content, Syria used 1970s Soviet technology and equipment to defeat the Three Bullies’ attack using the very latest up to date (shiny and smart) 2018 attack weaponry (that the US thought had solved the problems encountered in the 2017 missile attack on Syria).
103 missiles launched of which Syria destroyed 71.
This is the real story. The very latest US technology defeated by 50 year old Soviet weaponry.
If you were a real US general rather than an arm chair general, you’d know the game is up!
Israel is the only one left fooling itself that it stands a chance confronting Russia.
As an aside, the number of US pilots that refuse to fly when Russia’s S-400 system is turned on are legion. When the system locks on you it is terrifying because as a pilot you are a dead-man-flying to slightly misquote a famous phrase! You clearly have no idea how terrifying this is even for the most experienced pilots!
Royal Air Force pilots are so horrified at being located by S-400s that when they flew from Aquitori in Cyprus they actually flew westwards away from Syria before launching their useless missiles, all of which failed to reach their targets.
Russia has already stated they will now deliver S-400 systems to Syria after this attack by the Three Bullies and their useless armed forces.

Without the kurdish marxists terror groups, which turkey will soon eliminate, the whole of Syria would be continued to be liberated by Iran/Russia/Hezbollah/SAA, as was Iraq liberated by its Army and the PMU.

If Yankystan stayed out then Syria would be in control of its sovereign territory instead, the US acts as the air force for al quaeda and al nusra, you cant win a war without ground forces, and the yanky empire has very few of those in Iraq or Syria.

Grow up and stop congratulating yourself like you did everything yourself, leave Syria immediately and take those marxists (i thought you were right wing, fundamentalist christians, why do you love Marxists now?) scum with you. They have stolen arab lands and that was the whole plan, look how they crumble into dust when not supported with the imperial air force (Afrin)?

The war will now move into guerrilla tactics, arabs in kurdish stolen areas will be encouraged to attack occupying forces, to few to be bombed cost effectively, and too many for the yanks and marxists to defend without severe attrition. You will never have peace in Syria, it will be Fallujah and Najaf, every day until you leave.

Your coalition of the coerced amounted to only the US airforce, and a few saudi and uk jets. You did nothing to liberate the rest of syria, and only captured a single city, Raqqa, while the Russian alliance LIBERATED jihadi controlled cities which were supplied by your chicken shit alliance of scared shit nations.

When Yankystan entered the war, it was to install another Islamic state, just as they did in Iraq, just as they did in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, the US Empire has unleashed sunni fundamentalism for its own ends, and is to infantile to admit it or clean up their mess.

so…the chemical false flag was meant as payback for Syria and Russia disrupting the American plan of taking Damascus.
implied are threats by Putin but what were they? and at what point do the warnings of Russia (but never actually acting on them ) no longer serve their porpoise?
do the peoples of Syria and Iran for example know the truth of what you claim here or do they only see Russia talking tough but never acting?

if the unstated goal of the americans is now regime change and it is being pushed by an upset isreal who now have the presidents ear with their man …..are we to expect israel and the american warmongers to simply abandon their Syrian ideas?
the point of my questioning Russia intent since one need not be a military general to understand the goals of usa/israel remain the same.

The point of a threat is not to carry it out if you are obeyed. The yanky imperialists were warned of the consequences, and they were VERY careful to observe the Russian warning.

The Russian response? Did you think they would sink a rusty cruiser and start a massive conflict? No, just as they had to watch, now you will watch, every day, your jihadi friends slaughtered without restraint. Expect the Russian airforce to return (it had left, but your genius leader brought them back) and do 70 sorties per day over the remaining pockets of US/UK backed FILTH.

EVERY part of Syria will be returned to the legitimate government no matter how long it takes, are you going to have another failed war like Afghanistan? 16 years later and the taliban are stronger than ever, the country a basket case, if you stay in Syria expect a never ending low level guerilla war on your illegal presence.

The US will watch, every day, while their jihadi friends are slaughtered without restraint. Expect the Russian airforce to return and do 70 sorties per day over the remaining pockets of US/UK backed FILTH. Non-stop attacks from the entire SAA, siege the area, then bus the remaining scum to idlib (easier to bomb them in the end phase, if they are all together).

Actually, I would bypass Idlib and support resistance cells across the euphrates. The US historically has not supported guerrilla style wars, with high casualty rates and no objectives. The SAA dont have to capture any land held by the kurds, they just have to make it costly hell to hold.

The goal of Moscow as well as the Axis of Resistance is to avoid the outbreak of WWIII by starting Armageddon and the ancient elites wish to fulfill Revelation (which they – the Pharisees – wrote and planted in the Bible about 500 A.D.). Now Moscow has not shown any spiritual knowledge of their enemy and hence they “win one and lose one”, as Sun Tzu said happens if you don’t know your enemy.

The point is not talking tough but to say that there might be a response depending on how NATO handles this, both for the sake of discouraging an attack as well for minimizing it and for psychological reasons towards the various spectators.

geez..this is very serious.don’t put stuff like the bible and revelation into it.
.
your point about sitting back and taking any punishment the other side deems appropriate because they stop short of totally annihilating you….is ridiculous because no aggressor has ever quit on their own accord while not fulfilling their intentions.

you think missile attacks ..killing civilians …sanctions..harming economies…threats to bomb..when ever and what ever for any reason…is a fair exchange for sitting back and hoping they dont go to far…is a fair exchange.

Johanna, I understand your disappointment, but one has to be realistic. Russia has a very limited set of feasible options besides risking full blown global nuclear war. They have played their hand exceptionally well so far, having prevailed against an enemy with vast resources and a lot of options.

But let’s not kid ourselves: IF the US/Israel/Saudi Arabia went all in, the tiny Russian force in Syria would not stand a chance. Actually, israel/USA would love to have Russia attack their ships or planes because they would then take that as justification to “retaliate” without any restraint. We are talking about a Iraq 2003 style attack, only more powerful and swift.

my biggest fear is actually not so much another staged “chemical weapons attack” – the West has demonstrated that merely claiming it is more than sufificient. If you do not need to come up with evidence, you actually need not even stage it anymore. my bigger worry is a gulf of tonkin style of false flag, blamed on syria or Russia.
Look up the USS Liberty that was sunk by Israel. They did it once – they could do it again.

My only hope is that the adults in D.C. (Mattis seems to be one, while Trump and Bolton certainly are not) do understand that Russia may be forced to indeed risk nuclear war over Syria, ebven though it would not be an imminent threat of Russian motherland. Why so? Because if Russsia would allow them to take Syria, they will take on Iran next. And Putin is a brave and wise, courageous and decent man. But there are others, some of them in high military positions that may judge things differently. . They may feel that Russia has to make a stand now, at ALL costs. Or else, Russia would have to make that stand a few years later anyway under vastly worse conditions, when the enemy has ammased ever more troups at russia’s borders. These people could actually be right in their assessment that Putin already was too compromising and soft and forgiving, by accepting slap aftar slap after slap.

If these people, in an event of emrgency decided that Russia had to act firm and that any further retreat was unacceptable, we would have the ingedients for nuclear armageddon. I am afraid, few in the West understand that risk, because Russia has always acted with great restraint so far. Suddenly, that restraint may not be possible any longer.

Much in the bible is tampered with, like that Mark, Luke, Paul +1 were not any of Jesus’ entrusted pupils and that their texts are full of paradoxes, planted by the clergy during the 382 A.D. Decree of the Council of Rome to deceive humanity.

Robin, we read from afar and can merely offer support against the coalitions criminal adventures. The mainstream media in the UK can only be described as something that Goering would be immensely proud of. Who or what is behind the uniformity of British media?
Our forces drop bombs on a Syrian Army and its allies fighting the murderous, self proclaimed ‘Jihadist’s’ but some of us know that they are frauds. A genuine Islamic force could not ignore the slaughter of victims alongside the Gaza internment fence. The so called ‘rebels’ are a tool of Israel and its allies, being used to divide. Palestinians have to rely on the Shia of Iran and Hezbollah. They should now publicly dismiss the Syrian anti government forces as the Israeli proxy they surely are.
Mr Magnier, yet another supremely informative article that explains the intricacies and the complex web in Syria. Unfortunately, I have no influence to stop the unjustified attack on the long suffering Syrians but I can claim to be knowledgeable, thanks to you and a very small group of independent and honest writers.

Published by Elijah J Magnier

Veteran War Zone Correspondent and Senior Political Risk Analyst with over 35 years' experience covering the Middle East and acquiring in-depth experience, robust contacts and political knowledge in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan and Syria. Specialised in terrorism and counter-terrorism, intelligence, political assessments, strategic planning and thorough insight in political networks in the region.
Covered on the ground the Israeli invasion to Lebanon (1st war 1982), the Iraq-Iran war, the Lebanese civil war, the Gulf war (1991), the war in the former Yugoslavia (1992-1996), the US invasion to Iraq (2003 to date), the second war in Lebanon (2006), the war in Libya and Syria (2011 to date). Lived for many years in Lebanon, Bosnia, Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria.
View all posts by Elijah J Magnier